本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

vendor-evaluation

Evaluate, select, and contract with vendors and SaaS tools. Use this skill when comparing alternatives, running an RFP, scoring vendors against criteria, negotiating contracts, planning a switch, or assessing a vendor's risk. Triggers on vendor evaluation, RFP, vendor selection, build vs buy, SaaS evaluation, vendor scorecard, vendor comparison, contract negotiation, vendor switch, procurement. Also triggers when a renewal is coming up or when a tool isn't meeting expectations.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(3)

  • SKILL.md11.1 KB
  • README.md358 B
  • references/evaluation-rubric.md6.7 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Vendor Evaluation

Pick the right tool or service, negotiate fair terms, and avoid the lock-in traps. Stack-agnostic. Applies to SaaS, infrastructure providers, agencies, and any external dependency.


When to use

  • Selecting a tool or vendor for a new need
  • Evaluating alternatives to a current vendor
  • Build vs buy analysis
  • Renewal coming up: should we stay or switch?
  • Running a formal RFP or RFI
  • Comparing finalists in a vendor selection
  • Negotiating a contract
  • Assessing vendor risk (financial, security, dependency)

When NOT to use

  • General cost reduction (use cost-optimization)
  • Specific contract legal terms (those go to legal)
  • Performance issues with an existing vendor (try fixing before switching)
  • Hiring an agency for a one-off project (lighter framework needed)

Required inputs

  • The need (what problem are you solving, what would success look like)
  • Constraints (budget, timeline, integration requirements)
  • Stakeholders (users, IT, security, finance, legal)
  • Existing context (what's already used, what's been tried)
  • Compliance requirements

The framework: 5 phases

A structured vendor evaluation. Skip phases at your peril.

Phase 1: Define the need

Before looking at vendors, define what you actually need.

  • What problem are you solving?
  • What's the user / use case?
  • What does "success" look like in 6 months? In 2 years?
  • What's the budget (range, not just ceiling)?
  • What's the timeline?
  • Are there must-have integrations or constraints?

The temptation: skip this and start demoing. Vendors are happy to show off; you end up choosing what looks shiny rather than what fits.

Phase 2: Build vs buy

Before evaluating vendors, decide whether you should build instead.

Build when:

  • It's core to the business (differentiating)
  • The need is so specific no vendor matches
  • The economics work at your scale
  • You have the team to maintain it
  • Vendor lock-in would be unacceptable

Buy when:

  • It's table stakes (not differentiating)
  • The need is well-served by existing products
  • The economics favor it
  • The team should focus elsewhere
  • The vendor's specialization beats your generalism

Most teams over-build. The rule of thumb: buy unless there's a strong reason to build. Then question even that strong reason.

Phase 3: Generate the shortlist

Cast a wider net than feels comfortable, then narrow.

Sources:

  • Internal team's existing knowledge
  • Industry analyst reports (Gartner, Forrester, etc.)
  • Peer recommendations (other companies similar to yours)
  • Reviews (G2, Capterra; with caveats about review quality)
  • Adjacent vendors you already use (often have the feature you need)
  • Open-source alternatives

Cast wide first. Aim for 5-8 candidates. Then narrow to 2-4 finalists for deep evaluation.

Phase 4: Score the finalists

Use a scorecard. Without one, you'll be swayed by demo theatrics or who has the friendliest sales rep.

Scorecard dimensions (weight by your situation):

Functional fit (40%): Does it do what you need? Edge cases handled? UX quality. Workflow fit.

Technical fit (15%): Integration with your stack. API quality and completeness. Data export and portability. Performance at your scale. Self-hosted, hybrid, or SaaS-only.

Operational fit (10%): Onboarding effort. Training and adoption. Documentation quality. Support quality (test by submitting a ticket). SLAs.

Security and compliance (10%): SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, etc., as applicable. Data residency. Encryption at rest and in transit. Access controls and audit logs. Penetration test results (ask). Subprocessors.

Vendor health (10%): Years in business. Funding and runway (or revenue if private). Customer base size and similar customers. Public references. Roadmap visibility.

Cost (10%): License or subscription cost. Implementation and onboarding cost. Training cost. Integration cost. Opportunity cost (in-house resource time). Switching cost (in case of failure).

Lock-in risk (5%): Data export quality. Standard formats vs proprietary. Migration paths to alternatives. Open standards alignment. Contract escape clauses.

Score each finalist 1-5 on each dimension. Multiply by weight. Sum.

The score isn't gospel. It surfaces the tradeoffs.

Phase 5: Negotiate

Most enterprise contracts are negotiable. Most aren't negotiated.

What's negotiable:

  • Price (multi-year, volume, prepayment, end-of-quarter timing)
  • Terms (payment schedule, renewal terms)
  • Success commitments (training, onboarding, support)
  • SLAs (uptime, response time, credits)
  • Termination clauses (auto-renewal, notice period, data export)
  • Liability caps and indemnity (legal will care about these)
  • Subprocessors and data handling (security/legal cares)

Common negotiation moves:

  • Multi-year discount (3-year for a 15-30% discount is common)
  • Volume tiers (commit to higher usage for a per-unit discount)
  • Annual prepayment for a discount
  • Free or discounted onboarding
  • Pilot pricing (trial period at reduced rate)
  • "Most favored customer" clauses (if your size warrants)

What to avoid:

  • Multi-year lock with no escape clause for material breach
  • Auto-renewal with short notice window (under 60 days; want longer)
  • "All right, no further negotiation" stance from the start
  • Signing without legal review

Workflow

Step 1: Define the need

Write a one-page brief: what we need, why, success criteria, constraints, stakeholders.

Step 2: Build vs buy

Honestly answer the build/buy question. Document the rationale.

Step 3: Generate shortlist

Wider net first, narrowed via desk research:

  • Read summaries
  • Skim reviews
  • Look at customer logos
  • Skim docs
  • Skim API specs

Eliminate obvious misfits. Land on 2-4 finalists.

Step 4: Run demos and trials

For each finalist:

  • Demo with the use case (don't take their default demo; bring yours)
  • Trial period if possible
  • Reference calls with similar customers
  • Pilot with real data if feasible

Don't be charmed by the polished demo. Try it with your real workflow.

Step 5: Run security and compliance review

Critical for any vendor handling sensitive data:

  • Request SOC 2 / ISO 27001 reports
  • Review their security questionnaire (most have one ready)
  • Verify data handling matches your requirements
  • Identify subprocessors

This can take weeks for enterprise vendors. Start early.

Step 6: Score

Apply the scorecard. Do this collaboratively with stakeholders.

The scoring conversation matters more than the final number. It surfaces disagreement (one person scored UX 5, another scored 2: why?).

Step 7: Negotiate

With the apparent winner:

  • Open negotiation by asking for terms (not just price)
  • Be willing to walk
  • Run negotiations with #2 in parallel where appropriate (gives you leverage)

Step 8: Plan the rollout

Contract signing is the start, not the end. Plan:

  • Onboarding owner
  • Training plan
  • Migration plan if replacing an incumbent
  • Success criteria at 30, 90, 180 days
  • Renewal calendar

Step 9: Document

Record:

  • The decision and the rationale
  • Alternatives considered
  • Scorecard results
  • Negotiated terms
  • Renewal date and notice deadlines
  • Owner of the relationship

This is gold for the next renewal or the next similar evaluation.


Failure patterns

Skipping the needs definition. Demoing first. Buying what's shiny. Realizing 6 months in that the actual need wasn't met.

Single-source decisions. Talking to one vendor; deciding. No comparison. Probably overpaying or under-fitting.

Charisma-driven decisions. Buying based on the sales rep's likability. The product is what you'll use for years; the rep won't be there.

Reference calls that the vendor curated. Of course their references love them. Find references the vendor didn't suggest.

Glossing over security. Security review skipped because of timeline pressure. Then a breach. Slow down or accept the risk explicitly.

Demos that don't match the use case. Their default demo, not yours. Always do a use-case demo.

Trial that doesn't simulate real usage. A trial with synthetic data tells you the product works in synthetic conditions. Use real (or close to real) data.

Negotiating only on price. Terms, SLAs, and exit clauses matter more for long-term satisfaction than 5% price.

Auto-renewal without notice tracking. Renewal happens; rate goes up 15%. No one was watching. Track renewals; review with notice.

Lock-in without exit plan. Tightly integrating into a vendor's proprietary surface. When you want to leave, you can't. Plan exit at the start.

Multi-year contract for an unproven vendor. Save the multi-year for vendors you trust. New vendor: shorter term, evaluate after.

No internal champion. Tool selected; no one drives adoption. Tool sits unused. Identify the champion before signing.

Negotiating after a verbal commitment. "Yes, we want to buy" means they have less reason to negotiate. Keep options open until terms are settled.

Ignoring red flags in security review. Vendor's security responses are evasive or incomplete. Treat as a no.

Comparing apples to oranges. Vendors price differently (per user, per usage, flat). Build a comparable cost model at your scale.


Output format

A vendor evaluation document includes:

  • Need brief: problem, success criteria, constraints
  • Build vs buy decision: with rationale
  • Shortlist: 2-4 finalists with brief description
  • Scorecard: filled out per finalist, or state the gap per the data-availability rule
  • Demo and trial notes: what was learned
  • Security and compliance summary: findings per finalist
  • Reference call notes: what customers said
  • Recommendation: which vendor, with rationale
  • Negotiated terms: what was agreed
  • Rollout plan: onboarding, training, migration
  • Renewal calendar: with notice deadline

If required data is unavailable

This skill's output depends on data, measurements, or tool results it cannot generate on its own. When a required input, tool, or data source is unavailable or unverifiable, the sanctioned output is the deliverable with the gap stated: what was needed, what was actually obtained or verified, and which parts of the output are affected. Fabricating, estimating, or interpolating a required number to complete the deliverable is never sanctioned. A stated gap is a complete answer.


Reference files

  • references/evaluation-rubric.md - Scoring template with weighted dimensions, 1-5 scale criteria for each dimension, and a worked vendor-comparison example.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Run a comprehensive WCAG accessibility audit covering perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust principles. Use this skill whenever the user wants to audit accessibility, review WCAG compliance, fix accessibility issues, prepare for accessibility certification, address an accessibility lawsuit risk, or systematically improve a site's accessibility. Triggers on accessibility audit, WCAG audit, a11y audit, accessibility compliance, ADA compliance, screen reader test, keyboard navigation, accessibility report, fix accessibility, axe scan. Also triggers when accessibility issues have been reported and need systematic remediation.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

rampstackco/claude-skills9512026年10月7日 更新

How to produce ad creative that converts at performance scale. Hook patterns, format selection, video pacing, variation systems, sequential testing methodology, fatigue detection, brand-voice alignment without conversion dilution, and platform-specific creative norms. Triggers on ad creative, ad design, hook patterns, ad video pacing, creative testing, ad variations, creative refresh, creative fatigue, refresh ad creative, video ads for Meta, TikTok creative, LinkedIn ad creative, ad asset library. Also triggers when a team is producing creative at scale, planning a creative test cycle, or auditing why creative is not converting.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

rampstackco/claude-skills9512026年10月7日 更新

How to read paid media dashboards without fooling yourself. Attribution models, platform reporting quirks, multi-platform reconciliation, ROAS vs LTV horizon traps, statistical noise in performance metrics, incrementality testing, and the failure modes that produce expensive lessons. Triggers on read paid media dashboard, attribution analysis, ROAS vs LTV, multi-platform reconciliation, ad incrementality, geo holdout, conversion lift study, ghost bidding, paid media reporting, board-deck paid media metrics, blended CAC, MMM, MTA, last-click attribution. Also triggers when a marketer is about to scale, kill, or rebudget a campaign based on platform metrics, or when reconciling platform reports against warehouse revenue.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

rampstackco/claude-skills9512026年10月7日 更新

Run a structured after-action review (postmortem, retrospective) on a launch, incident, or completed project to capture timeline, root cause analysis, contributing factors, and actionable lessons. Use this skill whenever the user wants to run a postmortem, retrospective, AAR, or after-action review on any past event. Triggers on after-action report, AAR, postmortem, retrospective, retro, post-incident review, what went well what didn't, lessons learned, blameless postmortem, root cause analysis, RCA, five whys. Also triggers when the user has just shipped something or just resolved an incident and wants to capture learnings.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

rampstackco/claude-skills9512026年10月7日 更新

How humans and AI compose in content workflows. Where AI legitimately participates, where humans must own, hybrid workflow patterns, voice ownership preservation, the AI slop problem, disclosure and transparency, team calibration, and the ethics of intellectually honest AI-assisted content production. Triggers on AI content workflow, AI-assisted writing, hybrid content production, AI in editorial, AI slop, AI disclosure, AI usage policy, AI content ethics, voice preservation with AI, team AI calibration. Also triggers when content feels generic despite quality tools, when team AI usage has drifted into inconsistency, or when a regulated or trust-sensitive context requires explicit AI policy.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

rampstackco/claude-skills9512026年10月7日 更新

Design measurement frameworks including event taxonomy, KPI hierarchy, dashboard architecture, attribution models, and analytics implementation strategy. Use this skill whenever the user wants to plan analytics, design dashboards, build event taxonomies, define KPIs, set up tracking, or audit existing measurement. Triggers on analytics strategy, measurement plan, event taxonomy, tracking plan, KPI framework, dashboard design, north star metric, attribution model, conversion tracking, GA4 setup, Mixpanel setup, analytics audit. Also triggers when the user has data but no clear way to use it, or wants to make decisions but doesn't know what to track.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

rampstackco/claude-skills9512026年10月7日 更新

rampstackco のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する